Print 108 comment(s) - last by sweetca.. on Dec 1 at 7:51 PM

Big corporate corn farmers celebrate major win, share prices in corn corps. inch higher

Battered by a drought, and hit a second time by the U.S. government's artificial inflation of corn prices, many small livestock farmers were desperately hoping that the Obama administration’s and its appointed leadership at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would agree to a temporary waiver on blending requirements of ethanol in vehicles.

I. Big Corn Gets a Helping Hand from the Obama Admin.

The EPA on Friday echoed the sentiments of big corn special interests saying it found no evidence that "significant harm" would be caused by not granting a waiver.

The decision came as somewhat of a surprise.  Many sources had expected the Obama administration to instead punt on the issue; the decision to side with the well-heeled special interests to push a program that is unpopular and likely will now cost American jobs was unexpected.

The auto industry has also vigorously opposed the EPA's decision to bump ethanol blending requirements to 15 percent.  They argue that the higher blend will ruin the engines of older vehicles, increasing emissions and forcing consumers to pay for expensive repairs or abandon their vehicles.

Obama bribery wide
Obama and Bush both backed big corn special interests. [Image Source: Politically Incorrect]

The EPA has alleged that it knows the science behind fuel blending better than the engineers who make cars, essentially calling the automakers liars.

The decision will also impact consumers, as ethanol provides less gas mileage in traditional engines that gasoline.  In other words, unless gas stations start charging less at the pump (which seems rather unlikely) consumers will be paying the same amount per gallon, for less equivalent fuel.

Even environmentalists are outraged at the Obama administration, given that ethanol has been shown to not only waste energy, but also increase carbon emissions.  Comments, Michal Rosenoer, biofuels policy campaigner at Friends of the Earth, to The Detroit News:

If the worst U.S. drought in more than 50 years and skyrocketing food prices are not enough to make EPA act, it falls to Congress to provide relief from our senseless federal support for corn ethanol.  The RFS is a broken policy — rather than giving us clean energy, it's incentivizing biofuels like corn ethanol that are exacerbating our economic and environmental problems.

Congress needs to cut corn ethanol from the RFS entirely to protect the economy and the environment from this destructive and dirty fuel.

But despite the united opposition, the Obama administration appears resolute in following its predecessor, the Republican Bush administration, in choosing to side with the big corn special interest groups.

II. EPA to Small Farmers: "Deal With It"

Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Air and Radiation fires back at the critics, commenting, "We recognize that this year's drought has created hardship in some sectors of the economy, particularly for livestock producers.  But our extensive analysis makes clear that congressional requirements for a waiver have not been met and that waiving the RFS will have little, if any, impact."

In other words, the EPA admits it recognizes that farmers are struggling, resorting to desperate measures like feeding their livestock candy waste; but when it comes to bucking a key special interest's agenda the EPA's answer to farmers is basically "tough luck".

Farm drought
EPA claimed to be sympathetic to farmers, but refused to help them with a waiver.
[Image Source: US News]

Over 200 members of Congress, eight state governors, and numerous college professors sign a letter arguing that the blending targets would indeed have a dire impact on farmers.

So who wins?  The biggest winners are the corn and ethanol industry, particularly the growers, who benefit the most from the artificial inflation of corn prices.  Many of these growers are not even family owned, but rather are large corporate farms run by deep-pocketed entities like Archer Daniels Midland Comp. (ADM) and ConAgra Foods, Inc. (CAG).  Indeed, both companies saw a rise in share prices following the EPA's decision.

corn profits
Big corn donates deeply to federal politiicans, who in turn reward it with billions in subsidies.
[Image Source:]

So the word is official -- the U.S. will continue to manipulate prices in the fuel department, despite the cost to consumers, the environment, automakers, livestock farmers, and U.S. jobs.  That's bad news for most -- unless you happen to be an Archer Daniels Midland shareholder.

Source: The Detroit News

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Whats new?
By Uncle on 11/19/2012 11:59:33 AM , Rating: 2
Fascism showing its ugly head again.Corporations are getting bolder, not even trying to hide failed consumer policy. Hey America how does it feel to be Lackeys for the 1%.

RE: Whats new?
By ebakke on 11/19/2012 12:10:30 PM , Rating: 3
Ugh. It's rough. It feels even worse on election night when your ideas are reject by 98-99% of the other voters.

RE: Whats new?
By JasonMick on 11/19/2012 12:33:45 PM , Rating: 2
Ugh. It's rough. It feels even worse on election night when your ideas are reject by 98-99% of the other voters.
Some of us wrote in our candidate.

Just to show you how much our two party system is truly a ruling party system, in several states (including my own) the Republican party managed to exclude Gary Johnson from the ballot by petitioning to categorize him (against his will) as a "Republican" in the primaries, and many folks didn't realize that if they voted straight ticket Libertarian, the election board would simply count it as if you didn't vote for President. How's that for Democracy?

Reportedly the boards are also tossing third party votes for candidates who weren't officially running like Ron Paul -- so essentially it may be like you never voted, if you didn't vote for America's ruling parties.

My suggestion to anyone who did vote third party, particularly those who wrote in is to check your local county election results . Most counties now have their results available online, although most don't list the actual names written in. Make sure if you wrote in, that at least one write in vote was recorded; if not, you have a legitimate case to b--ch about.

RE: Whats new?
By ebakke on 11/19/2012 12:46:04 PM , Rating: 4
Make sure if you wrote in, that at least one write in vote was recorded; if not, you have a legitimate case to b--ch about.
Sure, but to what end? I'd much rather spend my energy explaining/defending libertarianism to a fellow citizen than I would arguing with a bureaucrat. I mean, yeah, your 1 vote should be counted regardless of who you vote for. But if we're only taking about the 17 non-GOP/DFL votes in the midst of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions of total votes... there are larger fish to fry.

RE: Whats new?
By Samus on 11/19/12, Rating: -1
RE: Whats new?
By JasonMick on 11/19/2012 2:07:44 PM , Rating: 2
consider your topics. what the hell is this, and most, political, non-technology related articles doing on Daily Tech
Vehicles and ethanol are not technology topics??

Face it, technology and politics often meet; it's called "tech policy".

RE: Whats new?
By Samus on 11/19/12, Rating: 0
RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 4:46:37 PM , Rating: 3
Samus, we get it. You worship Obama and voted for him both times.

But for the rest of us, this is more than just political gossip. It's a major economic intervention and is a poster child for why a centrally planned economy, can't and won't ever work. It illustrates precisely what's wrong with America. It also gives an ominous outlook for the tech industry. If bureaucrats and "czars" think they know better than the engineers who make the cars, how much longer before the government starts poking around in your code?

RE: Whats new?
By Dorkyman on 11/19/2012 6:25:17 PM , Rating: 4
The reason that election night was such a shock and downer for so many was not that Messiah got re-elected. After all, the guy's a putz and will be gone in 4 years.

No, the real tragedy is that 51% of the voting public thought it was a good idea to re-elect him. THAT'S the source of the sadness. Kiss the magic era (roughly corresponding to the 20th century) of the USA goodbye.

RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 7:31:10 PM , Rating: 2
Bingo. It's tough to share a country with a majority thinks that endless welfare handouts and debt fueled spending binges can go on forever, and that economic central planning is a workable system. Basically, a county ignorant to history, common sense, economics, and the Constitution itself. Sad indeed to have not a single thing in common with my ignorant countrymen. They're all dead strangers to me now.

RE: Whats new?
By YashBudini on 11/19/2012 7:40:27 PM , Rating: 3
Endless welfare handouts occur with both parties. Remember corporate welfare? Corporations are people too, remember that?

RE: Whats new?
By Samus on 11/19/12, Rating: -1
RE: Whats new?
By Souka on 11/19/2012 11:53:47 PM , Rating: 4
Meh... I run all my lawn equipment on non-ethonal gas.
Now running my 1999 Subaru on it to... got a %12 boost in my fuel economy.

Was running a consistent 20mpg (hundreds of datapoints to support this)
On Non-E gas, I'm now getting 22.5mpg (a few dozen datapoints to support this).

It's a tie in $$/mile price wise, but hey... no Ethonal is probably going to save me. for non-e gas near you! :)

RE: Whats new?
By Ringold on 11/20/2012 12:06:13 AM , Rating: 3
one of the greatest Presidents of all time


When it's not election season, even a lot of Democrat's aren't happy with him. Hard-left doesn't like him, the entire right doesn't. Just a segment of the center-left. The guy managed to win a campaign of personalities.

Meanwhile, under his watch, economy's done nothing. EPA's run wild. Middle East has gone from shitty to shittier. Iraq's on the verge of seeing Kurdistan say "To hell with this already" and going its own way. Afghanistan, depending on Karzai, could be Taliban run again by decades end at this rate. In Asia, despite a "pivot", our allies are worried we're full of words and no deeds if it came down to it. Ah, and that "reset" with Russia? Yeah, that got us.. lets see.. nothing, except a nuclear treaty that has us, again, cut more than they do. Seems legit.

And for all that extra debt, we've got something to show for it, right? High-speed maglev trains EVERYWHERE, right? Maybe flying cars? A glorious military victory against evil? Men on Mars, asteroids getting mined?

Oh wait, we don't have ANYTHING to show for it? Hmm.

Yeah. Best President ever. Totally makes Eisenhower look like a nitwit.

RE: Whats new?
By Cerin218 on 11/21/2012 6:54:49 PM , Rating: 2
Sometimes I really wish you (D) bags would actually say useful things instead of talking points. Fox News? Really? Did Fox News make the 6 TRILLION new debt? Did Fox News have 8%+ unemployment for 4 years? Did Fox News cut our credit rating? Did it spend our money on massive green projects that went bankrupt? Did it make it law that you HAD to buy health insurance from the private sector as a requirement of good citizenship by perverting the Interstate Commerce Clause? Did Fox News make it law that any American can be held indefinitely without due process? Did Fox News kill an American ambassador and provide guns to Mexican criminals?

Or did Fox News just report it when Obama did these things.

And you call us sheep? If I was a Democrat leader I would Stalin you. I would steal all our possessions and stuff you in an gas chamber myself because you all literally BEG for it.

RE: Whats new?
By Uncle on 11/20/2012 3:12:56 PM , Rating: 1
Ya, you must have thought you were in Hell during the 8 Bush years when the National Debt sky rocketed out of control, a trillion dollars just looking for WMD's. Oh ya forgot,that was a Trillion Dollars just for the Big Lie of the Bushes. Shoot, the Cons(Reps) had government for 8 years. Did your life get any better. I just remember a lot of Body Bags coming home. Plus a huge debt handed over to the Dems on a silver platter when the people couldn't stomach any more lies.

RE: Whats new?
By Cerin218 on 11/21/2012 6:48:02 PM , Rating: 2
Haha!!! At least Bush had an excuse. Obama spent 6 TRILLION without even an excuse. How is that for a silver platter? His investors and hadlers seem to have made out like bandits. The CEO from Solyndra even had the nuts to show his face at a few of the Democrat gatherings. Don't forget by the way that a MAJORITY of Democrats voted to go to war, expand war, and continue to fund war. Bush literally could not have done it without you, for all that you love to blame him. Not like Obama and Libya... By the way, the current president that campaigned to end the A-stan war, still hasn't. Nor has he figured out how to fund it. Heck, he hasn't even made a budget YET and he's in his second term. Bush's unemployment was no where near Obama's 8%+ unemployment HIS ENTIRE TERM. The only reason Bush even had that is because the deregulation of the banking industry and poor policy by the Democrats caused the housing and financial crisis. Heck Obama even managed the first credit rating cut for our country in our ENTIRE history.

Obama sucked. You supporters are deceiving yourselves. It's called hypocrisy and it's the cornerstone of being liberal.

RE: Whats new?
By Rukkian on 11/20/2012 4:12:26 PM , Rating: 1
I doubt it was actually 51% that agreed with him. I know I voted for him, but only because of who he was running against. Romney was completely out of touch and a douchebag of epic proportions. If the right would put up a true fiscal conservative, and not just a reverse robin hood, I think they would have won handily.

Put up a candidate that is willing to make cuts across the board - drop entitlements and also drop tax cuts for the rich, cut programs that benefit rich and poor alike (and middle class) and I would vote for him easily.

RE: Whats new?
By YashBudini on 11/20/2012 5:08:51 PM , Rating: 2
Ironically you got voted down because of the emotional backlash on the first 2 sentences of your response, and despite the fact that the rest of your post is spot on.

Nobody ever talks about all the loopholes Reagan closed that greatly favored the rich, funny how that works these days.

RE: Whats new?
By Cerin218 on 11/21/2012 6:57:53 PM , Rating: 2
Because Reagan is DEAD. Has been for some time. Amazing how Democrats ALWAYS bring up the past but never learn from it an omit blame for their leadership for ANYTHING.

RE: Whats new?
By EnzoFX on 11/19/12, Rating: 0
RE: Whats new?
By HrilL on 11/19/2012 2:41:50 PM , Rating: 5
You're completely wrong. I voted 3rd party. I didn't vote for evil. Both of the "two" parties are exactly the same when it comes to the FED, taking away my freedom, and out of control spending. Maybe if people actually knew what was going on and supported a party they believed in then we'd have a working system but that won't happen until sheeple like yourself stop voting for something they don't want. Gary Johnson happens to have a proven track record of successes seeing how he was a 2 term governor, lowered taxes, created jobs, and left the state with over a billion dollar surplus. But Yeah voting for one of the two clowns is a much better idea. Got it.

RE: Whats new?
By JasonMick on 11/19/2012 2:44:34 PM , Rating: 5
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.

-John Quincy Adams

I'm not advising anyone to vote third party if they don't do their homework and have a compelling reason why they feel that is their best option. I'm all for everyone voting for who they think is best.

You think Romney would have been great for the country? Great, I hope you voted for him.

You think Obama, is "hope" for the future and moving the nation "forward"? Well, I hope you voted for him, if you really think that.

Ultimately, though, I wish people would spend more time on sites like OpenSecrets, MapLight, ACLU, and EFF, studying how the current political system is bilaterally reducing civil liberties, while increasingly bowing to special interests.

All I want is for people to inform themselves. Is that disgusting or wrong?

As for third parties, I fail to see why you find them so distasteful.

George Washington, who won the freedom for our country, addressed this issue directly in which he called the two-party system a monster of "alternate domination". He spoke:
The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

I'll let that statement speak for itself.

RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 4:51:09 PM , Rating: 2
You're spot on Jason. Great post.

RE: Whats new?
By YashBudini on 11/19/12, Rating: -1
RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 4:54:03 PM , Rating: 2
Enzo, that was perhaps the dumbest and most contradictory comment I've ever read on this site.

"If you don't like the system, change it, but that involves joining it, being a part of it."

We are trying to change it, by joining and voting for 3rd parties. Remember, voting for the lesser of two evils, is still evil, so stop supporting evil.

I voted for Gary Johnson, am proud of it, and would do it again if I had to, despite the whining of apathetic, cynical nihilists like yourself.

RE: Whats new?
By FastEddieLB on 11/19/2012 11:01:11 PM , Rating: 4
How's that for Democracy?

We're in a republic, not a democracy. On that note, California has WAY too much power. When the next lowest state has enough of a gap for a whole other state to fit in, that's too much. It's broken and needs to be fixed.

RE: Whats new?
By Jeffk464 on 11/19/2012 12:42:13 PM , Rating: 3
You have a choice of two candidates that are completely whored out to special interests groups. How much difference does it make? and how can you get excited whichever party get elected?

RE: Whats new?
By ebakke on 11/19/2012 1:34:40 PM , Rating: 2
You may have chosen from two candidates, but you had the choice of many more. The whole point of my post is that 98-99% of voters chose a GOP/DFL candidate, which as you correctly point out, isn't much of a choice. I, however, did not. Hence my disappointment that my views don't match the rest of the voting populace.
how can you get excited whichever party get elected?
I don't.

RE: Whats new?
By bobcpg on 11/19/2012 12:17:30 PM , Rating: 1
Feels good because I wasn’t born with an entitlement spoon in my mouth. Also I get the opportunity to become the 1% and while doing so I’ll probably develop processes/cures so your lazy poor ass can live a little better.

RE: Whats new?
By Uncle on 11/19/12, Rating: -1
RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 1:35:31 PM , Rating: 5
Woah there Uncle, you're deviating a bit from the narrative. I'll give you some advice to help prevent you from committing a thought crime.

You see, hating rich people is definitely in fashion, however you need to be careful to only hate the right kind of rich people. You'll often hear terms like "big oil", "big pharma", and "big tobacco". These people are definitely worth hating because they are evil and are members of the 1%.

On the other hand, there are companies like Apple, like you mentioned, that are the richest in the world. There are also various media/Hollywood companies who are quite wealthy too. These are what we call "honorary 99%-ers". Even though their executives and major shareholders are in the 1%, we like what they do so much that we give them a waiver from our scorn. It also helps that they are reliable contributors and voters to various Democratic candidates and causes. For this reason, it's not ok to hate them. For you will never hear words like "big tech" used in a negative context.

So in conclusion, it's fine to hate successful people, but just make sure you hate the right ones, and give a pass to the rest.

Thanks for listening, and please think according to the approved memes. This message brought to you by the MSM thought police.

RE: Whats new?
By Uncle on 11/19/2012 2:30:03 PM , Rating: 1
Sorry I could of picked hundreds of other companies. apple just came to mind cause they like to be in the news,front and center, branding their name as usual, even if its not good news for the rest of us. By the way I don't hate these companies, I dislike how they function as a "good corporate citizen".

RE: Whats new?
By Solandri on 11/19/2012 2:51:57 PM , Rating: 4
The last few recessions we've had, or as you would put it politely, a bubble burst. None have been blamed on the middle class, just the wall street gang, bankers, fund managers, just the group in the 1%.

Actually, I'd blame the last few bubbles on the middle class. I remember numerous reports in the 1990s that the percent of people investing in stocks was the highest it had ever been. So lots of middle class people were starting to invest in stocks, and some were even braving the venture capital waters (investing in start-ups). It was this huge influx of money combined with inexperience with investing which inflated the values of a lot of companies far beyond where they should have gone - a bubble.

When that bubble popped, they got spooked by the market and sought a safer place to put their money. What could be safer than real estate? After all, unlike stocks which are just pieces of paper if the company goes bust, you've got a real physical asset which still holds value. So we got the housing market bubble. And shortly after the housing bubble burst we had a rush on oil, during prices up to nearly $150/bbl. Everyone needs energy, even in a poor economy, right? Currently we have a rush on gold as the "safe" investment.

Everyone wants to make easy money. It's easy to make easy money if you're rich and have tens of millions of dollars to throw around. A mere 1% gain for the year will let you live comfortably on $100k or more. You don't have to do any of the investment work, you just pay a guy to do it for you.

But if you have just a few tens of thousands to invest, it's not going to be easy. You have to work and do your research on what you're investing in. Make sure it's a sound company (and industry), not just snake oil. You want to be like the rich guy and pay someone (a fund manager) to do this due diligence for you. But his job isn't based on keeping you happy like the rich guy's personal broker's is. He's managing the money for thousands of little fish like you, and he's probably also managing a dozen other funds. So he's much more likely to make decisions which screw you over.

RE: Whats new?
By YashBudini on 11/19/2012 2:57:40 PM , Rating: 1
I'd blame the last few bubbles on the middle class

Pffft, professional money managers made all the same mistakes you peg on the middle class. And not a shred of evidence to support your statement. Sounds more like the characteristic self loathing that so many have on the right.

RE: Whats new?
By Ringold on 11/20/2012 12:14:20 AM , Rating: 1
Off hand I can't think of specific authors, but I'm pretty certain I've read a lot of research showing retail investors did significantly worse. Wall Street types even (short-sightedly, from a PR perspective) call them "dumb money." Last ones to buy on the way up, last ones to sell at the market bottom.

RE: Whats new?
By YashBudini on 11/19/12, Rating: 0
RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 4:57:46 PM , Rating: 2
As far as Bill Dudley is concerned, you can eat iPad.

RE: Whats new?
By Jeffk464 on 11/19/12, Rating: 0
RE: Whats new?
By 96suzuki on 11/19/12, Rating: 0
RE: Whats new?
By Jeffk464 on 11/19/2012 12:51:46 PM , Rating: 1
This country is going down because of corporate rule. They built up china so they could save 2 cents per widget, now china is turning around and out competing our economy. The days of the US being the number one economic and military power in the world are basically numbered.

RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 1:37:23 PM , Rating: 4
No, it's going down because of government intervention in the economy (like the article), and unsustainable welfare and warfare spending. Do some math and you'll get it soon enough.

RE: Whats new?
By Ammohunt on 11/19/2012 1:46:15 PM , Rating: 1
We went through industrialization in the 19th century and our standard of living adjusted along with it. No industrialized country can compete with a country that is just now going through industrialization. Chinas standard of living is rising fast the average Chinese are starting to be able to afford domestic and imported products. China is the next big counsumer market smat business know this and are positioning themselves to take full advantage. Corporate rule is a myth taught by fools in college to impressionable college age kids.

RE: Whats new?
By YashBudini on 11/19/2012 2:33:20 PM , Rating: 2
Hey America how does it feel to be Lackeys for the 1%.

As evidence here, plenty of happy go lucky members of the plutarchy.

RE: Whats new?
By ezorb on 11/21/2012 4:01:30 PM , Rating: 2
You do know that both Hitler and Mussolini were dedicated socialists, and that Fascism is and anti-capitalist movement, right, I sure you know that Fascism was only considered right wing by the Soviets at the time, somehow it is now "common knowledge" but factually incorrect. You know that, right?

RE: Whats new?
By tamalero on 11/22/2012 11:53:11 AM , Rating: 2
also shows how big is the US GOV involved in maintaining the farming in the US.

way too much subsidies.

"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki